DNC

DemfromCT over at DailyKos has an interesting interview with Ruy Teixeira, an expert on political demographics and a Senior Fellow at both The Century Foundation and Center for American Progress and author of the recently published working paper titled, Demographic Change and the Future of the Parties.

While you should go check it out in its entirety, here are the main points, which should be very familiar to faithful Future Majority readers.

• The Republican base is shrinking. The white, working class vote, a demographic that you hear all the "smart" television personalities talk about, is vanishing before our eyes, notes Teixeira. We heard a lot about this particular voting bloc in the 2008 Democratic primary, especially in the Ohio, Texas, and Mississippi contests. Yet, those states, like everywhere else, are seeing the size of this group diminish.
  

  In Texas, the white working class share is down 17 points, with minorities up 9 points and white college graduates up 7 points. In Ohio the share of white working-class voters fell by 15 points between 1988 and 2008 while white college graduates rose by 8 points and minorities by 6 points. Even a state like Mississippi has seen a huge drop in the white working class vote since 1988 (down 21 points).

• Millennials continue to decidedly identify with the Democratic Party. Though we continue to battle the "conventional wisdom" that youth always become more conservative with time, Teixeria corrects this, pointing to multiple studies that show partisan loyalty increases with age. And why would Millennials be attracted to the GOP anyway? In supporting the oppressive Arizona immigration law, continuing to treat gay people as if they are not human, and acting as if government has no redeeming value, it is almost as if the Republican Party is running away from our generation (you know, like Mark Kirk).
• To continue to build a long-term political advantage while championing good policy, the Democrats need to provide an alternative to Arizona's SB 1070, getting behind comprehensive immigration reform. Polling shows that the Arizona legislation is popular, but so is a description of a fairer comprehensive reform, in which the federal government strengthens border security and investigates employers who knowingly hire undocumented immigrants. These undocumented workers currently living in the United States would be required to register with the federal government, have criminal background checks, pay taxes, learn English, and go to the back of the line for U.S. citizenship (84 percent of those supporting the Arizona law support this alternative). For the Democrats to put forth a strong alternative to the GOP-backed position, they would be strengthening their attachments with already friendly Latino voters, and they also would be enhancing their stature as a party that can solve our larger problems.

The writing is on the wall. Despite the gloomy outlook for the midterms at this point, there are quite a few promising long-term trends for the party. Yet, in order for these to mean anything, we must go all out, institutionalizing peer-to-peer registration efforts. Luckily the DNC recently unleashed their voter registration strategy for the midterms, which significantly targets young voters and minority voters, a large chunk of the President's and the Democrats' base.

And while we face some short-term stress in 2010 while looking at some friendly long-term trends, the GOP is in the opposite situation. While the Tea Party continues to drum up conservative resistance to Obama and the Democrats (occasionally attracting attention for racist behavior), they are moving in the wrong direction of where they need to be to have any influence on the Millennial vote in the long-term. With Millennials forming about 40 percent of the electorate (and 44 percent of the generation identifying as a minority) in 2020, they form the anchor of this country's electoral future; meanwhile, the GOP can't seem to break away from the Tea Party, which actively resists a move toward the center.

For further reading, check out Teixeira's white paper (linked above) and read the reviews by Tom Schaller for FiveThirtyEight.com and Ed Kilgore at the Democratic Strategist.

Matt Bai's piece in the New York Times Magazine chronicles the emerging tensions between the White House and the Congress as they strategize for the 2010 mid-terms. Within the piece, Bai discusses the generational dynamic at play as the DNC (what is now the Obama-backed OFA) is pushing congressional candidates (against their wills) to make their pitches to voters normally perceived as unreliable.

...The lesson that Plouffe and his operation took away from the dismal 2009 elections is that Obama can act like a matchmaker of sorts, introducing the party’s candidates to new voters and vouching for their intentions, but it’s only going to matter if the candidates themselves embrace the so-called new politics. What that means, practically speaking, is that the White House is urging candidates to divert a fair amount of their time and money — traditionally used for buying TV ads and rallying core constituencies — to courting volunteers and voters who haven’t generally been reliable Democrats.

This is not what members of Congress or their campaign managers are trained to do, and it has created something of a cultural chasm between the White House and the party apparatus. There is a strong generational component here. With some exceptions, Obama’s passion for organizing finds more enthusiasm among candidates closer to the president’s age and newer to politics (candidates like Senator Michael Bennet of Colorado), while older Democrats have a harder time imagining that a bunch of volunteers and a dozen virtual town-hall meetings are going to matter more than labor endorsements and some killer 30-second spots...

[...]

By Democratic Party standards, this is a relatively muted internal disagreement. But it nonetheless points to the emergence of rival schools of thought within the party when it comes to Obama’s importance as a party leader. Some see him as having transformed both the electorate and the nature of campaigning in what could be a lasting and fundamental way, meaning that things are possible now — both in terms of liberal governance and winning elections — that did not seem possible before. Others view 2008 mostly as a cathartic election that had more to do with conditions in the country than with Obama’s peculiar magic, and they don’t think the party should assume that there are millions of new voters out there who can be tapped if you just knock on the right doors. These two worldviews coexist uneasily among the party’s elected officials and candidates, young and old, in every part of the country — sometimes just hours apart.

The congressional camp within the Democratic Party reflects the status quo that continues to claim that new voters -- including young voters -- don't vote and are apathetic. What they refuse to understand is that we are civically active; we do vote when we are genuinely engaged in a conversation about issues through a medium relevant to our lifestyles. These labor endorsements and "killer" television ads are almost as boring as network news these days. Instead, we should be investing in the peer-to-peer voting drives and organizing work that have already increased the youth vote for three straight elections. From Mike Connery's Journalist Cheat Sheet:

Tip #5: If you insist on reporting the same old story that young people vote at a lower rate than the rest of the electorate, then you have an obligation to also inform your readers/viewers/listeners that youth turnout has increased for 3 years straight, and is at its highest level in over a decade. You also have an obligation to note that in 2006 the youth vote swung a number of important federal races, including pushing Democratic candidates Jon Tester, Jim Webb, and Joe Courtney over the top.

Source: Historical voting patterns (pdf), Impact on Races (pdf), Midterm Turnout (pdf).

Tip #6: If you are going to report on low-turnout among young voters, you also have an obligation to note that young people face more barriers to voting than do older voters. We move more frequently, requiring us to re-register sometimes on a yearly basis, on campus we face a lack of voting machines and long lines, and many university towns actively discourage and try to prevent students from voting.

Source: League of Conservation Voters Education Fund

Tip #7: There are simple fixes to the problems outlined in #6 – election day and same-day registration and mail-in voting are two such fixes that can be applied at the state level. These have been proven to bump youth turnout by as much as 14%!!!!! It would be nice if you reported on them occasionally.

Source: CIRCLE

Tip #8: Young voters will participate if they are asked to, particularly by a peer. This is proven. But the system stopped asking long ago by removing resources and manpower away from young voter outreach. Only in recent years have organizations – and a few campaigns – begin to reengage young voters in any serious way. The result is three straight years in which youth turnout increased. In plain terms: young voters are not apathetic. Rather, the system fails to engage them in any meaningful way.

Source: Young Voter Strategies, Voter Mobilization Tactics

Tip #9: Stop reporting on “celebrity activism” as the Rosetta Stone for understanding the youth vote. This is a Boomer and Gen-X construction created for a broadcast TV culture of the 80s and 90s. Today’s young voters are interested in peer-to-peer communication and networked action. From Facebook to on the ground, peer to peer organizing at club, bars, barbershops and apartment canvassing, the most effective, and sustainable developments in youth organizing in the past five years have come from new, grassroots organizations doing peer to peer organizing on the ground or online. Stop reporting on celebrities and start doing the work of talking to and reporting on the activities of these organizations. Good places to start include:

Forward Montana, The Oregon Bus Project, New Era Colorado, Young Democrats of America, and The League of Young Voters.

There are many more, but let’s do this in baby steps. Start with these and we’ll work out way deeper into youth organizing together.

Young voters can be courted; it just takes some courage and genuine effort. The Speaker's office and legislators like Congressman George Miller (D-CA) have been great on youth policy issues, but in purely electoral terms, the Congressional campaign plan outlined above is disappointing. While OFA doesn't have a pristine record with young voters, they apparently get it more than many of the old guard congressmen and congresswomen.

UPDATE: An example of Congress not understanding youth priorities or youth culture today? Ike Skelton, a longtime Democratic congressman, provides one:

The chairman of the House Armed Services Committee said Tuesday that he thought the military should keep its ban on openly gay service members in part because he did not want to open a national discussion about homosexuality. The chairman, Representative Ike Skelton, a conservative Missouri Democrat, said he thought the debate in Congress over the proposed repeal of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy might force families to explain homosexuality to their children. “What do mommies and daddies say to their 7-year-old child?” Mr. Skelton asked reporters at a news media breakfast.

Gallup's new presidential approval report, Obama Approval Continues to Show Party, Age, Race Gaps, indicates that young and minority voters are the strongest supporters of the President.

The poll shows why the Vote 2010 strategy for OFA/DNC that President Obama spoke about last month makes sense. Younger and minority voters are the most supportive, are traditionally underrepresented at the polls, and require outreach to boost turnout.

Moving away from the old white high efficacy voter turnout model is going to require hard work, which is why campaigns have be so hesitant to do so in the past. If there is one positive externality of today's divisive political climate, it's that it may actual lead to real youth and minority outreach efforts in traditional campaigns.

This week the Democratic National Committee announced a new entity responsible for promoting and re-engaging 25-39 year olds into supporting the President and his agenda.

Gen44 describes itself as

"Gen44 is a new concept founded from some of the campaign’s most successful programs – Generation Obama (GO) and the DNC TrailBlazers.

Building on this strong record of success, the DNC has merged these critical programs in order to create Gen44 . Gen44 will seek to harness the energy and excitement from the 2008 Presidential election by cultivating the next generation of fundraisers for the DNC and Organizing for America. Gen44 will work to maintain their passion from the campaign and engage their networks and colleagues in support of the President and the Democratic Party."

Sharon Yang describes the group as a year around engagement mechanism that communicates with the 25-40 year olds not just during "sexy presidential elections."

BlogTalk Radio interviews Yang about the new program here (click here if the link below doesn't work)

See the former fake President's bodyman "Charlie" from the West Wing - Dule Hill announce Gen44

Obama campaign manager David Plouffe just posted a video for Organizing for America (OFA). After the colossal youth fail in the Massachusetts Special Election, two of the highest priorities of OFA members was bringing first time 2008 voters back to the polls in 2010 and registering new voters.

I just wrote about the contrast in the Mass elections where partisan organizers neglected young voters vs. the non-partisan youth outreach organizations that got the youth vote to the polls to pass a tax hike to wealthy people in Oregon. Does this mean OFA is committed to young voters in the 2010 election the way they were in 2008, or is this going to be a lip-service kinda thing?

Despite the chatter from the punditry, yesterday was a big day for Millennials. While they focus on two races with candidates that ignored the youth vote and wonder why turnout did not match 2008's all time high, a number of young people won local elections throughout the country.

In New York, Young Democrats of America Democratic National Committeewoman Stephanie Hausner was the highest vote getter in her election to the Clarkstown Town Council. Former NYSYD National Committeeman David Carlucci won re-election as Clarkstown Town Clerk. Two former New York Young Democrats local chapter leaders, Dan French and David Fried, won local elections as well.

In New Hampshire, state Young Democrats President Garth Corriveau was elected Alderman in Manchester as was fellow NHYD Patrick Arnold.

In Washington, Kim Cole was elected to the Lynnwood City Council, Andy Ryder to the Lacey City Council, Amy Ockerlander to the Duvall City Council.

Over Twitter I've been told of a recent high school graduate that was elected to a school board in Michigan, as well as a number of other Millennial candidates that were giving victory speeches last night.

In towns and cities across the country young voters showed up to the polls to elect their own. These young local candidates realized the power of their generation, chose to run for office, and by reaching out to fellow young voters won their elections.

Yesterday's lesson was not that young voters only showed up to the polls in 2008 to elect Barack Obama, but that Democrats must continue the youth outreach and funding that occurred during the 2008 cycle. The Millennial generation does not exist to serve at the beck and call of the DNC without being respected. When a candidate speaks to the issues of young voters and actively campaigns for their votes, they will deliver. The new generation of candidates understands this, and most of those candidates have a title with -elect after it today. Creigh Deeds and Jon Corzine didn't, and in return were relegated to giving concession speeches.

The lesson for Democrats in 2010 is this: take the youth vote for granted at your own peril. If you want young voters to deliver for you, you have to be serious about earning their votes.

Also check out Sarah's take on what yesterday meant.

UPDATE: It is important to note that the 2008 youth turnout was the result of funding and youth turnout effort from 2004 through 2008, and not an isolated 2008 effort.

OUCH! This morning's new swanked up GOP website launched. But Ben Smith at Politico notes the the "Future Leaders" page has an unfortunate omission.

Leadership is key, not that the Democratic Party is much better... a little better... but not by much. Their saving grace is the many non-partisan progressive groups and indeed the Young Democrats doing everything they can to develop youth leadership. Hopefully, some day, that will translate into the DNC reaching out to these youth to take leading positions in legislative offices and campaigns, and eventually run for office.

The DNC Youth Council is petitioning the Democratic Change Commission for a more youth-friendly primary and caucus process. You can read the text of the letter sent to the commission below:

DNC Youth Letter

Nearly three years ago, Democrats Work was launched with a simple goal: build a new service-based approach to politics. That meant making community service a big part of political activism -- not something divorced from political goals, but rather integral to the success in achieving them. This weekend, the "service politics" movement grows up and goes big.

On Saturday, the Democratic Party -- through the new Organizing for America project -- will hold the grassroots-powered National Day of Health Care Service. (You can check it out here: http://my.barackobama.com/HCservice.) The message is simple: while we fight for health care reform in Washington, D.C., we can also bring about change in our communities right now through service.

This is a big step for the DNC/OFA and an experiment worth trying. Health care reform may not be as easy to link to service as, say, the environment or education may be, but those who participate will get hands-on experiences and build relationships that won't come from television ads, town hall meetings, phone banks, or other "traditional" political activities.

We have come a long way from the days of begging local party organizations to try community service and schedule a few projects. The Georgia Democratic Party now has its own program called Georgia Democrats Work. Democrats from Northwest Arkansas to Auburn, Washington have embraced the approach. And rightfully so.

In October 2007, Democrats Work launched a pilot project in Arapahoe County, Colorado -- a hotly contested battleground -- to measure the effect of its Democrat-branded community service programs in targeted precincts and among targeted groups of voters. Fifty precincts were randomly divided into treatment and control groups. Democrats Work contacted voters eight times in the treatment precincts -- with a combination of mail and phone calls -- with information about the upcoming service opportunity and touting the success of past events over the course of a year. Afterwards, the organization measured the effect of the service-based approach on voters’ attitudes towards Democrats with polling.

The results with respect to young and unaffiliated young voters were extremely promising. Voters under the age of 35 in the treatment group (i.e., those who received information about the service events) reported being "warmer" towards the Democratic Party, felt the Democratic Party shares their values more than the Republican Party, and intended to vote for Democrats by wide margins. With respect to young, unaffiliated voters (not just all young voters), the results were even more encouraging. Democrats Work found that increased positive feelings towards Democrats caused a 30-point swing in vote share among young, unaffiliated votes.

This weekend, the service-based approach goes to scale in a way that we could have only imagined three years ago. Service politics -- the connection of direct service work and political action -- has finally grown up and the Democratic Party is a step closer to being the Party of Service.

Want to be a member of the Democratic National Committee? The DNC Youth Council is now accepting resumes from young people interested in becoming At-Large members:

Dear Young Democrat ~

Every four years the Democratic National Committee makes its appointments for 75 at-large members. The individuals selected for these positions are some of the best and brightest in our party. In keeping with the mission of the DNC Youth Council, it is our goal to ensure that young people are represented on the DNC including as at-large members.

The Youth Council will begin to accept resumes of young people interested in applying for these DNC at-large positions. Please use your networks and resources to reach out to young people who are interested in applying. Numerous people apply for at-large appointments and it is extremely competitive, so ensure that you are targeting young people who will standout above the rest. Please note that the DNC at-large appointments should not be confused with our DNC Youth Council at-large appointments process which will begin in July.

Interested individuals (who must be registered Democrats) should send a resume that includes their name, address, phone number, e-mail address, and a short statement of interest to YouthCouncil [at] dnc [dot] org. We will compile these resumes and submit them to the DNC’s Office of Party Affairs to be included as people to be considered for at-large positions. All resumes must be received by 5:00 PM EST on July 1st, 2009.